interest in finding out more. Yes, it's his mike, but he *invited* this
guy, how dare he talk to him like this? Talk about exploiting a tragedy.
John Stanley writes:
> good one
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cantrl. a [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 12:57 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly
>
>
> You can find the archived video online with a search. Fair and balanced.
>
> Partial Transcript: The O'Reilly Factor 2-4-03
>
> O'REILLY: In the "Personal Stories" segment tonight, we were surprised to
> find out than an American who lost his father in the World Trade Center
> attack had signed an anti-war advertisement that accused the USA itself of
> terrorism. The offending passage read, "We too watched with shock the
> horrific events of September 11... we too mourned the thousands of innocent
> dead and shook our heads at the terrible scenes of carnage -- even as we
> recalled similar scenes in Baghdad, Panama City, and a generation ago,
> Vietnam." With us now is Jeremy Glick, whose father, Barry, was a Port
> Authority worker at the Trade Center. Mr. Glick is a co-author of the book
> "Another World is Possible." I'm surprised you signed this. You were the
> only one of all of the families who signed...
>
> JEREMY GLICK: Well, actually, that's not true.
>
> O'REILLY: Who signed the advertisement?
>
> GLICK: Peaceful Tomorrow, which represents 9/11 families, were also
> involved.
>
> O'REILLY: Hold it, hold it, hold it, Jeremy. You're the only one who signed
> this advertisement.
>
> GLICK: As an individual.
>
> O'REILLY: Yes, as -- with your name. You were the only one. I was surprised,
> and the reason I was surprised is that this ad equates the United States
> with the terrorists. And I was offended by that.
>
> GLICK: Well, you say -- I remember earlier you said it was a moral
> equivalency, and it's actually a material equivalency. And just to back up
> for a second about your surprise, I'm actually shocked that you're
> surprised. If you think about it, our current president, who I feel and many
> feel is in this position illegitimately by neglecting the voices of Afro-
> Americans in the Florida coup, which, actually, somebody got impeached for
> during the Reconstruction period -- Our current president now inherited a
> legacy from his father and inherited a political legacy that's responsible
> for training militarily, economically, and situating geopolitically the
> parties involved in the alleged assassination and the murder of my father
> and countless of thousands of others. So I don't see why it's surprising...
>
> O'REILLY: All right. Now let me stop you here. So...
>
> GLICK: ... for you to think that I would come back and want to support...
>
> O'REILLY: It is surprising, and I'll tell you why. I'll tell you why it's
> surprising.
>
> GLICK: ... escalating...
>
> O'REILLY: You are mouthing a far left position that is a marginal position
> in this society, which you're entitled to.
>
> GLICK: It's marginal -- right.
>
> O'REILLY: You're entitled to it, all right, but you're -- you see, even --
> I'm sure your beliefs are sincere, but what upsets me is I don't think your
> father would be approving of this.
>
> GLICK: Well, actually, my father thought that Bush's presidency was
> illegitimate.
>
> O'REILLY: Maybe he did, but...
>
> GLICK: I also didn't think that Bush...
>
> O'REILLY: ... I don't think he'd be equating this country as a terrorist
> nation as you are.
>
> GLICK: Well, I wasn't saying that it was necessarily like that.
>
> O'REILLY: Yes, you are. You signed...
>
> GLICK: What I'm saying is...
>
> O'REILLY: ... this, and that absolutely said that.
>
> GLICK: ... is that in -- six months before the Soviet invasion in
> Afghanistan, starting in the Carter administration and continuing and
> escalating while Bush's father was head of the CIA, we recruited a hundred
> thousand radical mujahadeens to combat a democratic government in
> Afghanistan, the Turaki government.
>
> O'REILLY: All right. I don't want to...
>
> GLICK: Maybe...
>
> O'REILLY: I don't want to debate world politics with you.
>
> GLICK: Well, why not? This is about world politics.
>
> O'REILLY: Because, No. 1, I don't really care what you think.
>
> GLICK: Well, OK.
>
> O'REILLY: You're -- I want to...
>
> GLICK: But you do care because you...
>
> O'REILLY: No, no. Look...
>
> GLICK: The reason why you care is because you evoke 9/11...
>
> O'REILLY: Here's why I care.
>
> GLICK: ... to rationalize...
>
> O'REILLY: Here's why I care...
>
> GLICK: Let me finish. You evoke 9/11 to rationalize everything from domestic
> plunder to imperialistic aggression worldwide.
>
> O'REILLY: OK. That's a bunch...
>
> GLICK: You evoke sympathy with the 9/11 families.
>
> O'REILLY: That's a bunch of crap. I've done more for the 9/11 families by
> their own admission -- I've done more for them than you will ever hope to
> do.
>
> GLICK: OK.
>
> O'REILLY: So you keep your mouth shut when you sit here exploiting those
> people.
>
> GLICK: Well, you're not representing me. You're not representing me.
>
> O'REILLY: And I'd never represent you. You know why?
>
> GLICK: Why?
>
> O'REILLY: Because you have a warped view of this world and a warped view of
> this country.
>
> GLICK: Well, explain that. Let me give you an example of a parallel...
>
> O'REILLY: No, I'm not going to debate this with you, all right.
>
> GLICK: Well, let me give you an example of parallel experience. On September
> 14...
>
> O'REILLY: No, no. Here's -- here's the...
>
> GLICK: On September 14...
>
> O'REILLY: Here's the record.
>
> GLICK: OK.
>
> O'REILLY: All right. You didn't support the action against Afghanistan to
> remove the Taliban. You were against it, OK.
>
> GLICK: Why would I want to brutalize and further punish the people in
> Afghanistan...
>
> O'REILLY: Who killed your father!
>
> GLICK: The people in Afghanistan...
>
> O'REILLY: Who killed your father.
>
> GLICK: ... didn't kill my father.
>
> O'REILLY: Sure they did. The al Qaeda people were trained there.
>
> GLICK: The al Qaeda people? What about the Afghan people?
>
> O'REILLY: See, I'm more angry about it than you are!
>
> GLICK: So what about George Bush?
>
> O'REILLY: What about George Bush? He had nothing to do with it.
>
> GLICK: The director -- senior as director of the CIA.
>
> O'REILLY: He had nothing to do with it.
>
> GLICK: So the people that trained a hundred thousand Mujahadeen who were...
>
> O'REILLY: Man, I hope your mom isn't watching this.
>
> GLICK: Well, I hope she is.
>
> O'REILLY: I hope your mother is not watching this because you -- that's it.
> I'm not going to say anymore.
>
> GLICK: OK.
>
> O'REILLY: In respect for your father...
>
> GLICK: On September 14, do you want to know what I'm doing?
>
> O'REILLY: Shut up. Shut up.
>
> GLICK: Oh, please don't tell me to shut up.
>
> O'REILLY: As respect -- as respect -- in respect for your father, who was a
> Port Authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by
> barbarians...
>
> GLICK: By radical extremists who were trained by this government...
>
> O'REILLY: Out of respect for him...
>
> GLICK: ... not the people of America.
>
> O'REILLY: ... I'm not going to...
>
> GLICK: ... The people of the ruling class, the small minority.
>
> O'REILLY: Cut his mic. I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of
> respect for your father. We will be back in a moment with more of THE
> FACTOR.
>
> GLICK: That means we're done?
>
> O'REILLY: We're done.
>
>
> >Started a book last night by Bill O'Reilly.
> >I have to say I really haven't heard of the guy. I admit I don't watch
> >Fox and maybe my head is a little too buried in the computer screen
> >sometimes ... But I truly haven't been following the "O'Reilly
> >phenomenon".
> >
> >I am intrigued by the book. Starts out great (love the family part),
> >then sorta slides into a diatribe about politicians, government programs
> >and slams against the Clintons and George Clooney (justified or not, I'm
> >not making any decisions or stating opinions, just relating how it reads
> >so far).
> >
> >The reason I bought the book was because of a Parade article in the
> >Sunday paper a couple of weeks ago.
> >
> >I'm about halfway through it and took some time to look him up on the
> >net this morning. His philosphy about friends and surrounding yourself
> >with kind and generous people echoes mine, so I was curious about what
> >else he had to say.
> >
> >
> >So far, I can only find two kinds of information about him.
> >
> >1) Total adoration and hand clapping.
> >
> >2) Total vilification and booing.
> >
> >
> >Since this community is SO MUCH MORE in touch with
> >politics/reporters/current events than I, I was wondering if anyone here
> >had anything to say about him?
> >
> >I am only asking for constructive opinions, not "Why that SOB, he's a
> >slime worse than warm runny cowsh$t" Well, that may be a valid opinion
> >:D ... But I was hoping for something informative.
> >
> >Just my idle curiosity for the day ... I'm not too sure what to make of
> >him yet.
> >
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Erika
> >
> _____
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
